This part of the new change in the council under new Mayor Ruth Asmundson. But it is worse than simply a change in time, it represents a change in the entire procedure by which public comment has operated for the last two years.
Under the previous Ruth Asmundson Mayorship, public comment allotted two minutes per person. When Sue Greenwald took over as Mayor in 2006, she extended the time to three minutes per person, thereby opening up the process. Mayor Asmundson was notorious for cutting people off. We still have on video a scene where a UC Davis official who spoke beyond the allotted time was told by the Mayor, “We’re not listening.”
However, that pales in comparison to the new policy which seemingly aims directly at cutting the public out of the process almost altogether. Now, the public comment period runs from 6:45 PM to 7:00 PM. Anyone who wishes to speak past 7:00 PM must come back to the meeting after it all of the business is done and speak then.
The Brown Act governs the ability of the public to address of given governance board.
“Every agenda for regular meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public, before or during the legislative body’s consideration of the item, that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the legislative body, provided that no action shall be taken on any item not appearing on the agenda unless the action is otherwise authorized by subdivision.” (54954.3).
This policy falls within the realm of (b):
“The legislative body of a local agency may adopt reasonable regulations to ensure that the intent of subdivision (a) is carried out, including, but not limited to, regulations limiting the total amount of time allocated for public testimony on particular issues and for each individual speaker.”
So this policy clearly does not violate the Brown Act. However, cutting off and limiting public violates the spirit of the open government act. There are both practical and philosophical reasons to allow the public better access to addressing their elected representatives in local government. Frankly, the previous policy worked quite well. There was rarely a lengthy public comment period and when there was it reflected a large concern in the community about a particular issue.
The Vanguard hopes this is not an attempt by the Mayor to speed up council meetings. If that is the case, there are better ways to accomplish this. Public comment is a very small component of the meetings to begin with except in rare occurrences.
However public comment is vital toward an engaged electorate. If the school board could listen to hours of public comment for weeks on end when programs and schools were threatened to be cut, so too can the city council.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Does the mayor have the discretion to set this policy then? Or the chair of the school board?
Does the mayor have the discretion to set this policy then? Or the chair of the school board?
Does the mayor have the discretion to set this policy then? Or the chair of the school board?
Does the mayor have the discretion to set this policy then? Or the chair of the school board?
I thought I saw public commenters for the individual items…
I thought I saw public commenters for the individual items…
I thought I saw public commenters for the individual items…
I thought I saw public commenters for the individual items…
Public can always comment when an item comes up on the agenda.
I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.
Maybe this will mean that an agenda item scheduled last won’t be dealt with at midnight with no public comment at all. I think that people will always come out for an issue that they are passionate about and be able to get their voice heard at the time that these issues appear on the agenda.
Public can always comment when an item comes up on the agenda.
I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.
Maybe this will mean that an agenda item scheduled last won’t be dealt with at midnight with no public comment at all. I think that people will always come out for an issue that they are passionate about and be able to get their voice heard at the time that these issues appear on the agenda.
Public can always comment when an item comes up on the agenda.
I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.
Maybe this will mean that an agenda item scheduled last won’t be dealt with at midnight with no public comment at all. I think that people will always come out for an issue that they are passionate about and be able to get their voice heard at the time that these issues appear on the agenda.
Public can always comment when an item comes up on the agenda.
I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.
Maybe this will mean that an agenda item scheduled last won’t be dealt with at midnight with no public comment at all. I think that people will always come out for an issue that they are passionate about and be able to get their voice heard at the time that these issues appear on the agenda.
It’s a fine line to walk. On the one hand, people want adequate time to speak. On the other, they complain when city council or school board meetings run until midnight or 1 am, thereby effectively cutting out the participation of anyone who might want a decent night’s sleep. When there are dozens of people repeatedly making the same point (e.g., “Don’t cut our music program”, which could be stated effectively by a few people representing the group) I’m not sure that’s the best use of the council’s, the public’s, or the board’s time.
It’s a fine line to walk. On the one hand, people want adequate time to speak. On the other, they complain when city council or school board meetings run until midnight or 1 am, thereby effectively cutting out the participation of anyone who might want a decent night’s sleep. When there are dozens of people repeatedly making the same point (e.g., “Don’t cut our music program”, which could be stated effectively by a few people representing the group) I’m not sure that’s the best use of the council’s, the public’s, or the board’s time.
It’s a fine line to walk. On the one hand, people want adequate time to speak. On the other, they complain when city council or school board meetings run until midnight or 1 am, thereby effectively cutting out the participation of anyone who might want a decent night’s sleep. When there are dozens of people repeatedly making the same point (e.g., “Don’t cut our music program”, which could be stated effectively by a few people representing the group) I’m not sure that’s the best use of the council’s, the public’s, or the board’s time.
It’s a fine line to walk. On the one hand, people want adequate time to speak. On the other, they complain when city council or school board meetings run until midnight or 1 am, thereby effectively cutting out the participation of anyone who might want a decent night’s sleep. When there are dozens of people repeatedly making the same point (e.g., “Don’t cut our music program”, which could be stated effectively by a few people representing the group) I’m not sure that’s the best use of the council’s, the public’s, or the board’s time.
Scheduling a general public comment period at 7:00 pm and allowing a half an hour effectively means that the meeting starts at 6:30 pm for the council members and staff, but the agenda really doesn’t get rolling until 7:30 pm. This allows only 3-4 hours to deal with everything and that is only if the meeting goes until 11:00 pm.
I agree that allowing 15 minutes at 6:45 pm so that agenda items can start at 7:00 pm is a good thing. Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes.
Scheduling a general public comment period at 7:00 pm and allowing a half an hour effectively means that the meeting starts at 6:30 pm for the council members and staff, but the agenda really doesn’t get rolling until 7:30 pm. This allows only 3-4 hours to deal with everything and that is only if the meeting goes until 11:00 pm.
I agree that allowing 15 minutes at 6:45 pm so that agenda items can start at 7:00 pm is a good thing. Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes.
Scheduling a general public comment period at 7:00 pm and allowing a half an hour effectively means that the meeting starts at 6:30 pm for the council members and staff, but the agenda really doesn’t get rolling until 7:30 pm. This allows only 3-4 hours to deal with everything and that is only if the meeting goes until 11:00 pm.
I agree that allowing 15 minutes at 6:45 pm so that agenda items can start at 7:00 pm is a good thing. Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes.
Scheduling a general public comment period at 7:00 pm and allowing a half an hour effectively means that the meeting starts at 6:30 pm for the council members and staff, but the agenda really doesn’t get rolling until 7:30 pm. This allows only 3-4 hours to deal with everything and that is only if the meeting goes until 11:00 pm.
I agree that allowing 15 minutes at 6:45 pm so that agenda items can start at 7:00 pm is a good thing. Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes.
There are two public comment opportunities. One during public comment section which is a specifically designated time where people can talk about topics not on the agenda. And during the items themselves, when people can talk about the item.
Is it a fine line?
Not really. It’s a rare occurrence when public comment during the designated time spot goes beyond 15 minutes, it certainly is not a factor in the lateness of meetings, if the lateness of meetings is a concern, don’t put as many items on the agenda. Cutting out public comment time is not going to solve most of the time issues.
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
Joe Sherman is entitled to his time, just like anyone else. This is more likely to prevent the John Smiths of the world to be able to say anything after Sherman gets done with his weekly rant.
There are two public comment opportunities. One during public comment section which is a specifically designated time where people can talk about topics not on the agenda. And during the items themselves, when people can talk about the item.
Is it a fine line?
Not really. It’s a rare occurrence when public comment during the designated time spot goes beyond 15 minutes, it certainly is not a factor in the lateness of meetings, if the lateness of meetings is a concern, don’t put as many items on the agenda. Cutting out public comment time is not going to solve most of the time issues.
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
Joe Sherman is entitled to his time, just like anyone else. This is more likely to prevent the John Smiths of the world to be able to say anything after Sherman gets done with his weekly rant.
There are two public comment opportunities. One during public comment section which is a specifically designated time where people can talk about topics not on the agenda. And during the items themselves, when people can talk about the item.
Is it a fine line?
Not really. It’s a rare occurrence when public comment during the designated time spot goes beyond 15 minutes, it certainly is not a factor in the lateness of meetings, if the lateness of meetings is a concern, don’t put as many items on the agenda. Cutting out public comment time is not going to solve most of the time issues.
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
Joe Sherman is entitled to his time, just like anyone else. This is more likely to prevent the John Smiths of the world to be able to say anything after Sherman gets done with his weekly rant.
There are two public comment opportunities. One during public comment section which is a specifically designated time where people can talk about topics not on the agenda. And during the items themselves, when people can talk about the item.
Is it a fine line?
Not really. It’s a rare occurrence when public comment during the designated time spot goes beyond 15 minutes, it certainly is not a factor in the lateness of meetings, if the lateness of meetings is a concern, don’t put as many items on the agenda. Cutting out public comment time is not going to solve most of the time issues.
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
Joe Sherman is entitled to his time, just like anyone else. This is more likely to prevent the John Smiths of the world to be able to say anything after Sherman gets done with his weekly rant.
“Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes. “
No it doesn’t. The 6:30 to 7 time spot was used primarily for presentations. The council and staff still get however long they want to ramble on about announcements.
“Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes. “
No it doesn’t. The 6:30 to 7 time spot was used primarily for presentations. The council and staff still get however long they want to ramble on about announcements.
“Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes. “
No it doesn’t. The 6:30 to 7 time spot was used primarily for presentations. The council and staff still get however long they want to ramble on about announcements.
“Remember that this schedule also limits the council members and staff announcements to 15 minutes. “
No it doesn’t. The 6:30 to 7 time spot was used primarily for presentations. The council and staff still get however long they want to ramble on about announcements.
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better. If, on the other hand, it looks as if it is an attempt to stifle public comment, then watch out Ruth. You may find a good deal of dissenting opinions showing up on the editorial pages of the Davis Enterprise. People will have their say.
I don’t care if the comments start a bit earlier, so long as sufficient time is given for public comment. If the tone of Ruth’s attitude is to dismiss the public, she had better watch out. Ambassador Ruth may find her re-election won’t be guaranteed!
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better. If, on the other hand, it looks as if it is an attempt to stifle public comment, then watch out Ruth. You may find a good deal of dissenting opinions showing up on the editorial pages of the Davis Enterprise. People will have their say.
I don’t care if the comments start a bit earlier, so long as sufficient time is given for public comment. If the tone of Ruth’s attitude is to dismiss the public, she had better watch out. Ambassador Ruth may find her re-election won’t be guaranteed!
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better. If, on the other hand, it looks as if it is an attempt to stifle public comment, then watch out Ruth. You may find a good deal of dissenting opinions showing up on the editorial pages of the Davis Enterprise. People will have their say.
I don’t care if the comments start a bit earlier, so long as sufficient time is given for public comment. If the tone of Ruth’s attitude is to dismiss the public, she had better watch out. Ambassador Ruth may find her re-election won’t be guaranteed!
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better. If, on the other hand, it looks as if it is an attempt to stifle public comment, then watch out Ruth. You may find a good deal of dissenting opinions showing up on the editorial pages of the Davis Enterprise. People will have their say.
I don’t care if the comments start a bit earlier, so long as sufficient time is given for public comment. If the tone of Ruth’s attitude is to dismiss the public, she had better watch out. Ambassador Ruth may find her re-election won’t be guaranteed!
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.
In reading the comments in this section, it occurs to me that this new system is an attempt to cut down on public comment, but it will not shorten meeting times. What about cutting down on the time the City Council rambles on about their trips to foreign countries and the like? I can’t tell you how many times I have sat through Don Saylor’s droning on, in which he says absolutely nothing. Who cares about Ruth’s trips abroad? It is not city business!
As far as I am concerned, this looks like nothing more than A,S & S flexing their collective muscle, now that they won the election. It seems clear they think they now have a public mandate to do whatever the heck they want. So it will behoove the public, if they care, to object to this heavy-handedness. It shows an arrogance and disrespect for the public.
In reading the comments in this section, it occurs to me that this new system is an attempt to cut down on public comment, but it will not shorten meeting times. What about cutting down on the time the City Council rambles on about their trips to foreign countries and the like? I can’t tell you how many times I have sat through Don Saylor’s droning on, in which he says absolutely nothing. Who cares about Ruth’s trips abroad? It is not city business!
As far as I am concerned, this looks like nothing more than A,S & S flexing their collective muscle, now that they won the election. It seems clear they think they now have a public mandate to do whatever the heck they want. So it will behoove the public, if they care, to object to this heavy-handedness. It shows an arrogance and disrespect for the public.
In reading the comments in this section, it occurs to me that this new system is an attempt to cut down on public comment, but it will not shorten meeting times. What about cutting down on the time the City Council rambles on about their trips to foreign countries and the like? I can’t tell you how many times I have sat through Don Saylor’s droning on, in which he says absolutely nothing. Who cares about Ruth’s trips abroad? It is not city business!
As far as I am concerned, this looks like nothing more than A,S & S flexing their collective muscle, now that they won the election. It seems clear they think they now have a public mandate to do whatever the heck they want. So it will behoove the public, if they care, to object to this heavy-handedness. It shows an arrogance and disrespect for the public.
In reading the comments in this section, it occurs to me that this new system is an attempt to cut down on public comment, but it will not shorten meeting times. What about cutting down on the time the City Council rambles on about their trips to foreign countries and the like? I can’t tell you how many times I have sat through Don Saylor’s droning on, in which he says absolutely nothing. Who cares about Ruth’s trips abroad? It is not city business!
As far as I am concerned, this looks like nothing more than A,S & S flexing their collective muscle, now that they won the election. It seems clear they think they now have a public mandate to do whatever the heck they want. So it will behoove the public, if they care, to object to this heavy-handedness. It shows an arrogance and disrespect for the public.
” Mike Hart said…
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.”
Now this comment really hit a nerve. I can’t tell you the number of times I have gone to City Council meetings, waiting patiently for my topic to come up. It has not been unusual for me to have to leave by midnight, because the subject I was interested in commenting on was not raised until one or two in the morning.
There is a common policy by the city to put more controversial topics at the end of the agenda, in the hopes folks will have left – so there will not be any public comment. After this happened to me time and time again, I began making comments in the beginning, and then leaving. The City Council majority has so straight-jacketed the process, that it has already virtually cut out public participation. AND THAT WAS NO ACCIDENT.
” Mike Hart said…
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.”
Now this comment really hit a nerve. I can’t tell you the number of times I have gone to City Council meetings, waiting patiently for my topic to come up. It has not been unusual for me to have to leave by midnight, because the subject I was interested in commenting on was not raised until one or two in the morning.
There is a common policy by the city to put more controversial topics at the end of the agenda, in the hopes folks will have left – so there will not be any public comment. After this happened to me time and time again, I began making comments in the beginning, and then leaving. The City Council majority has so straight-jacketed the process, that it has already virtually cut out public participation. AND THAT WAS NO ACCIDENT.
” Mike Hart said…
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.”
Now this comment really hit a nerve. I can’t tell you the number of times I have gone to City Council meetings, waiting patiently for my topic to come up. It has not been unusual for me to have to leave by midnight, because the subject I was interested in commenting on was not raised until one or two in the morning.
There is a common policy by the city to put more controversial topics at the end of the agenda, in the hopes folks will have left – so there will not be any public comment. After this happened to me time and time again, I began making comments in the beginning, and then leaving. The City Council majority has so straight-jacketed the process, that it has already virtually cut out public participation. AND THAT WAS NO ACCIDENT.
” Mike Hart said…
Its amusing that the people who come to speak rarely stay to listen.”
Now this comment really hit a nerve. I can’t tell you the number of times I have gone to City Council meetings, waiting patiently for my topic to come up. It has not been unusual for me to have to leave by midnight, because the subject I was interested in commenting on was not raised until one or two in the morning.
There is a common policy by the city to put more controversial topics at the end of the agenda, in the hopes folks will have left – so there will not be any public comment. After this happened to me time and time again, I began making comments in the beginning, and then leaving. The City Council majority has so straight-jacketed the process, that it has already virtually cut out public participation. AND THAT WAS NO ACCIDENT.
The real “public comment” time wasters are those who insist on making re-election campaign statements before every vote. Following the council’s bad example, other city bodies have fallen into the bad habits of each commissioner explaining the logic of their every vote. If Ruth wants to speed things up, the real mother lode of wasted time to be reduced comes from limiting council speeches that are essentially unlimited public comment during prime time. Speeches before each vote, according to strict Parliamentary Rules, should be limited to attempts to persuade their fellow voting council members. She might try the technique we used on the planning commission back in 2004 and she might be more successful in making it work: set at the end of the meeting an agenda item for council persons to “explain their previous votes” to the TV & chambers audiences. Campaigning for election before every little vote is a self-indulgence that properly would be shifted out of prime time. During that planning commission experiment, sadly, few commissioners were willing to delay their rhetoric. Mayor Ruth’s proposal to move much of public free-media time to a late hour of irrelevance deserves a chance — but only if the council persons are also forced to wait (for the midnight hour) to be heard.
-Dennis
The real “public comment” time wasters are those who insist on making re-election campaign statements before every vote. Following the council’s bad example, other city bodies have fallen into the bad habits of each commissioner explaining the logic of their every vote. If Ruth wants to speed things up, the real mother lode of wasted time to be reduced comes from limiting council speeches that are essentially unlimited public comment during prime time. Speeches before each vote, according to strict Parliamentary Rules, should be limited to attempts to persuade their fellow voting council members. She might try the technique we used on the planning commission back in 2004 and she might be more successful in making it work: set at the end of the meeting an agenda item for council persons to “explain their previous votes” to the TV & chambers audiences. Campaigning for election before every little vote is a self-indulgence that properly would be shifted out of prime time. During that planning commission experiment, sadly, few commissioners were willing to delay their rhetoric. Mayor Ruth’s proposal to move much of public free-media time to a late hour of irrelevance deserves a chance — but only if the council persons are also forced to wait (for the midnight hour) to be heard.
-Dennis
The real “public comment” time wasters are those who insist on making re-election campaign statements before every vote. Following the council’s bad example, other city bodies have fallen into the bad habits of each commissioner explaining the logic of their every vote. If Ruth wants to speed things up, the real mother lode of wasted time to be reduced comes from limiting council speeches that are essentially unlimited public comment during prime time. Speeches before each vote, according to strict Parliamentary Rules, should be limited to attempts to persuade their fellow voting council members. She might try the technique we used on the planning commission back in 2004 and she might be more successful in making it work: set at the end of the meeting an agenda item for council persons to “explain their previous votes” to the TV & chambers audiences. Campaigning for election before every little vote is a self-indulgence that properly would be shifted out of prime time. During that planning commission experiment, sadly, few commissioners were willing to delay their rhetoric. Mayor Ruth’s proposal to move much of public free-media time to a late hour of irrelevance deserves a chance — but only if the council persons are also forced to wait (for the midnight hour) to be heard.
-Dennis
The real “public comment” time wasters are those who insist on making re-election campaign statements before every vote. Following the council’s bad example, other city bodies have fallen into the bad habits of each commissioner explaining the logic of their every vote. If Ruth wants to speed things up, the real mother lode of wasted time to be reduced comes from limiting council speeches that are essentially unlimited public comment during prime time. Speeches before each vote, according to strict Parliamentary Rules, should be limited to attempts to persuade their fellow voting council members. She might try the technique we used on the planning commission back in 2004 and she might be more successful in making it work: set at the end of the meeting an agenda item for council persons to “explain their previous votes” to the TV & chambers audiences. Campaigning for election before every little vote is a self-indulgence that properly would be shifted out of prime time. During that planning commission experiment, sadly, few commissioners were willing to delay their rhetoric. Mayor Ruth’s proposal to move much of public free-media time to a late hour of irrelevance deserves a chance — but only if the council persons are also forced to wait (for the midnight hour) to be heard.
-Dennis
Excellent suggestion, Dennis!!! It feels as if public comment is being done away with as much as possible, while still allowing the Council majority to drone on forever. NOT FAIR!
Excellent suggestion, Dennis!!! It feels as if public comment is being done away with as much as possible, while still allowing the Council majority to drone on forever. NOT FAIR!
Excellent suggestion, Dennis!!! It feels as if public comment is being done away with as much as possible, while still allowing the Council majority to drone on forever. NOT FAIR!
Excellent suggestion, Dennis!!! It feels as if public comment is being done away with as much as possible, while still allowing the Council majority to drone on forever. NOT FAIR!
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.
I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.
I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.
I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.
If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.
I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.
“If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.”
“I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.”
I concur. I had no idea that meetings were running that long. I now applaud anything that can be done to shorten the meeting!
“If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.”
“I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.”
I concur. I had no idea that meetings were running that long. I now applaud anything that can be done to shorten the meeting!
“If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.”
“I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.”
I concur. I had no idea that meetings were running that long. I now applaud anything that can be done to shorten the meeting!
“If the result of Ruth’s new system is to ensure meetings end sometime before 11 am, then it might be for the better.”
“I’m shocked by this comment. When a meeting begins at 6:30 pm, you would have them finish 16.5 hours later? That’s much too long in my humble opinion.”
I concur. I had no idea that meetings were running that long. I now applaud anything that can be done to shorten the meeting!
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
The last time Joe Sherman talked at public comment, his “comments” were really a threat of harm toward the council members. It made my hair stand on end. I fully expected him to pull out a gun and start shooting. It’s just not amusing anymore.
I realize that it is “public comment” and he has a right to come and say anything he wants. But I don’t think that we as a community should have to put up with him spewing such hate speech and threats. Limiting his time is the only way to deal with him, I guess. I think 2 minutes is enough time to say that the Police are evil and the council members and staff are going to burn in hell along with supporting documentation from the Bible.
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
The last time Joe Sherman talked at public comment, his “comments” were really a threat of harm toward the council members. It made my hair stand on end. I fully expected him to pull out a gun and start shooting. It’s just not amusing anymore.
I realize that it is “public comment” and he has a right to come and say anything he wants. But I don’t think that we as a community should have to put up with him spewing such hate speech and threats. Limiting his time is the only way to deal with him, I guess. I think 2 minutes is enough time to say that the Police are evil and the council members and staff are going to burn in hell along with supporting documentation from the Bible.
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
The last time Joe Sherman talked at public comment, his “comments” were really a threat of harm toward the council members. It made my hair stand on end. I fully expected him to pull out a gun and start shooting. It’s just not amusing anymore.
I realize that it is “public comment” and he has a right to come and say anything he wants. But I don’t think that we as a community should have to put up with him spewing such hate speech and threats. Limiting his time is the only way to deal with him, I guess. I think 2 minutes is enough time to say that the Police are evil and the council members and staff are going to burn in hell along with supporting documentation from the Bible.
“I think we are all tired of the Joe Shermans of the world using the public comment period to vent their frustrations with daily life.”
The last time Joe Sherman talked at public comment, his “comments” were really a threat of harm toward the council members. It made my hair stand on end. I fully expected him to pull out a gun and start shooting. It’s just not amusing anymore.
I realize that it is “public comment” and he has a right to come and say anything he wants. But I don’t think that we as a community should have to put up with him spewing such hate speech and threats. Limiting his time is the only way to deal with him, I guess. I think 2 minutes is enough time to say that the Police are evil and the council members and staff are going to burn in hell along with supporting documentation from the Bible.
All the agendas I’ve seen since last summer have said, in big bold letters, “NOTE: Public comment may begin as early as 6:45 P.M.” Anyone who has looked at the agenda should be aware that they need to be there by 6:45 in order to guarantee themselves a chance to comment. This was the same with Sue as mayor. I don’t see what the big deal is.
All the agendas I’ve seen since last summer have said, in big bold letters, “NOTE: Public comment may begin as early as 6:45 P.M.” Anyone who has looked at the agenda should be aware that they need to be there by 6:45 in order to guarantee themselves a chance to comment. This was the same with Sue as mayor. I don’t see what the big deal is.
All the agendas I’ve seen since last summer have said, in big bold letters, “NOTE: Public comment may begin as early as 6:45 P.M.” Anyone who has looked at the agenda should be aware that they need to be there by 6:45 in order to guarantee themselves a chance to comment. This was the same with Sue as mayor. I don’t see what the big deal is.
All the agendas I’ve seen since last summer have said, in big bold letters, “NOTE: Public comment may begin as early as 6:45 P.M.” Anyone who has looked at the agenda should be aware that they need to be there by 6:45 in order to guarantee themselves a chance to comment. This was the same with Sue as mayor. I don’t see what the big deal is.
I wanted to talk today about the striping on 5th street It’s a disgrace I think the city ought to spend less timeat these city council meetings and more time with a bucket of paint in their hand, if you ask me I don’t understand why we have to have such high paid city workers when the whole place is going to heck and here we are just talking about it but anyhow where di d i leave my socks i had them a minute ago and now the y aren’t anywhere but i did find my shoes so i guess thats why i was able to come down here today so you better also do something about those dang kids who keep taking up all the picnic tables at central park you know you aren’t supposed to sit on those picnic tables you’e supposed to eat at them in my day we would’ve been hit with a willow switch from putah creek if we’d shown the disrespect we see from teh kids today and what about those darn mice that come across the road everytime they disk the field across from poleline road why isn’t the city doing anything about that i tell you it makes me so darn mad i’ve a good mind to run for city council if i could find my pants the one with the wallet it them so you got off easy tonight but i’ll be back next week and don’t tell me i’ve used up my two minutes i’m a taxpayer and dammit i want to tell you what you ought to be doing what you ought to be doing is setting up more programs for the mentally ill is what you should do so I could sign up.
I wanted to talk today about the striping on 5th street It’s a disgrace I think the city ought to spend less timeat these city council meetings and more time with a bucket of paint in their hand, if you ask me I don’t understand why we have to have such high paid city workers when the whole place is going to heck and here we are just talking about it but anyhow where di d i leave my socks i had them a minute ago and now the y aren’t anywhere but i did find my shoes so i guess thats why i was able to come down here today so you better also do something about those dang kids who keep taking up all the picnic tables at central park you know you aren’t supposed to sit on those picnic tables you’e supposed to eat at them in my day we would’ve been hit with a willow switch from putah creek if we’d shown the disrespect we see from teh kids today and what about those darn mice that come across the road everytime they disk the field across from poleline road why isn’t the city doing anything about that i tell you it makes me so darn mad i’ve a good mind to run for city council if i could find my pants the one with the wallet it them so you got off easy tonight but i’ll be back next week and don’t tell me i’ve used up my two minutes i’m a taxpayer and dammit i want to tell you what you ought to be doing what you ought to be doing is setting up more programs for the mentally ill is what you should do so I could sign up.
I wanted to talk today about the striping on 5th street It’s a disgrace I think the city ought to spend less timeat these city council meetings and more time with a bucket of paint in their hand, if you ask me I don’t understand why we have to have such high paid city workers when the whole place is going to heck and here we are just talking about it but anyhow where di d i leave my socks i had them a minute ago and now the y aren’t anywhere but i did find my shoes so i guess thats why i was able to come down here today so you better also do something about those dang kids who keep taking up all the picnic tables at central park you know you aren’t supposed to sit on those picnic tables you’e supposed to eat at them in my day we would’ve been hit with a willow switch from putah creek if we’d shown the disrespect we see from teh kids today and what about those darn mice that come across the road everytime they disk the field across from poleline road why isn’t the city doing anything about that i tell you it makes me so darn mad i’ve a good mind to run for city council if i could find my pants the one with the wallet it them so you got off easy tonight but i’ll be back next week and don’t tell me i’ve used up my two minutes i’m a taxpayer and dammit i want to tell you what you ought to be doing what you ought to be doing is setting up more programs for the mentally ill is what you should do so I could sign up.
I wanted to talk today about the striping on 5th street It’s a disgrace I think the city ought to spend less timeat these city council meetings and more time with a bucket of paint in their hand, if you ask me I don’t understand why we have to have such high paid city workers when the whole place is going to heck and here we are just talking about it but anyhow where di d i leave my socks i had them a minute ago and now the y aren’t anywhere but i did find my shoes so i guess thats why i was able to come down here today so you better also do something about those dang kids who keep taking up all the picnic tables at central park you know you aren’t supposed to sit on those picnic tables you’e supposed to eat at them in my day we would’ve been hit with a willow switch from putah creek if we’d shown the disrespect we see from teh kids today and what about those darn mice that come across the road everytime they disk the field across from poleline road why isn’t the city doing anything about that i tell you it makes me so darn mad i’ve a good mind to run for city council if i could find my pants the one with the wallet it them so you got off easy tonight but i’ll be back next week and don’t tell me i’ve used up my two minutes i’m a taxpayer and dammit i want to tell you what you ought to be doing what you ought to be doing is setting up more programs for the mentally ill is what you should do so I could sign up.
Charles Lee Thornton. That’s the name of the mentally ill guy in Kirkwood, Missouri who spoke up at every city council meeting complaining that the city officials were mistreating him.
Eventually the mayor and council in Kirkwood restricted his speaking privileges in public comments.
The New York Times reported, “In late January, a federal judge tossed out at a lawsuit Mr. Thornton had filed against Kirkwood and its officials. He contended that they had violated his free speech rights by prohibiting him from speaking out at meetings.
“In an interview with a local television station, Mr. Thornton’s mother said that Kirkwood officials had kept after her son, “giving him tickets for everything they could.””
In February, Mr. Thornton fought back. He brought a loaded gun to the Kirkwood City Council. The NY Times reported, “The violence began about 7 p.m., when the man approached a Kirkwood police officer in a parking lot near the police station and shot and killed the officer, a spokeswoman for the St. Louis County police, Tracy Panus, said late Thursday.
“Moments later, the man appeared inside City Hall, a short walk from the Police Department, shot and killed another police officer and then fatally shot three city officials who were inside the council meeting, officials said. Two others at the meeting were also shot and wounded, one critically, Ms. Panus said.”
Don’t be shocked if a mentally imbalanced man from Davis acts out in this same way.
Charles Lee Thornton. That’s the name of the mentally ill guy in Kirkwood, Missouri who spoke up at every city council meeting complaining that the city officials were mistreating him.
Eventually the mayor and council in Kirkwood restricted his speaking privileges in public comments.
The New York Times reported, “In late January, a federal judge tossed out at a lawsuit Mr. Thornton had filed against Kirkwood and its officials. He contended that they had violated his free speech rights by prohibiting him from speaking out at meetings.
“In an interview with a local television station, Mr. Thornton’s mother said that Kirkwood officials had kept after her son, “giving him tickets for everything they could.””
In February, Mr. Thornton fought back. He brought a loaded gun to the Kirkwood City Council. The NY Times reported, “The violence began about 7 p.m., when the man approached a Kirkwood police officer in a parking lot near the police station and shot and killed the officer, a spokeswoman for the St. Louis County police, Tracy Panus, said late Thursday.
“Moments later, the man appeared inside City Hall, a short walk from the Police Department, shot and killed another police officer and then fatally shot three city officials who were inside the council meeting, officials said. Two others at the meeting were also shot and wounded, one critically, Ms. Panus said.”
Don’t be shocked if a mentally imbalanced man from Davis acts out in this same way.
Charles Lee Thornton. That’s the name of the mentally ill guy in Kirkwood, Missouri who spoke up at every city council meeting complaining that the city officials were mistreating him.
Eventually the mayor and council in Kirkwood restricted his speaking privileges in public comments.
The New York Times reported, “In late January, a federal judge tossed out at a lawsuit Mr. Thornton had filed against Kirkwood and its officials. He contended that they had violated his free speech rights by prohibiting him from speaking out at meetings.
“In an interview with a local television station, Mr. Thornton’s mother said that Kirkwood officials had kept after her son, “giving him tickets for everything they could.””
In February, Mr. Thornton fought back. He brought a loaded gun to the Kirkwood City Council. The NY Times reported, “The violence began about 7 p.m., when the man approached a Kirkwood police officer in a parking lot near the police station and shot and killed the officer, a spokeswoman for the St. Louis County police, Tracy Panus, said late Thursday.
“Moments later, the man appeared inside City Hall, a short walk from the Police Department, shot and killed another police officer and then fatally shot three city officials who were inside the council meeting, officials said. Two others at the meeting were also shot and wounded, one critically, Ms. Panus said.”
Don’t be shocked if a mentally imbalanced man from Davis acts out in this same way.
Charles Lee Thornton. That’s the name of the mentally ill guy in Kirkwood, Missouri who spoke up at every city council meeting complaining that the city officials were mistreating him.
Eventually the mayor and council in Kirkwood restricted his speaking privileges in public comments.
The New York Times reported, “In late January, a federal judge tossed out at a lawsuit Mr. Thornton had filed against Kirkwood and its officials. He contended that they had violated his free speech rights by prohibiting him from speaking out at meetings.
“In an interview with a local television station, Mr. Thornton’s mother said that Kirkwood officials had kept after her son, “giving him tickets for everything they could.””
In February, Mr. Thornton fought back. He brought a loaded gun to the Kirkwood City Council. The NY Times reported, “The violence began about 7 p.m., when the man approached a Kirkwood police officer in a parking lot near the police station and shot and killed the officer, a spokeswoman for the St. Louis County police, Tracy Panus, said late Thursday.
“Moments later, the man appeared inside City Hall, a short walk from the Police Department, shot and killed another police officer and then fatally shot three city officials who were inside the council meeting, officials said. Two others at the meeting were also shot and wounded, one critically, Ms. Panus said.”
Don’t be shocked if a mentally imbalanced man from Davis acts out in this same way.
At the city council hall in Davis, is there a metal detector? Seems to me there should be one, if crazy people have guns.
At the city council hall in Davis, is there a metal detector? Seems to me there should be one, if crazy people have guns.
At the city council hall in Davis, is there a metal detector? Seems to me there should be one, if crazy people have guns.
At the city council hall in Davis, is there a metal detector? Seems to me there should be one, if crazy people have guns.
How about a metal detector for the crazy people that sit on council and keep the public from speaking their minds especially when they disagree? How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz
Is it really a surprise to any of you that Ruth Asmundson, who is known for limiting public input and being EXTEMELY RUDE to members of the public, is now trying to limit the public even more????
Be honest with yourselves.
She is self-centered and thinks that we care about her travels and goes on and on about the “work she is doing…blah, blah, blah…”
Just do what you are supposed to do Ruth and stop wasting our time.
The next four years are going to be absolute hell with Ruth as mayor followed by the ever self-centered, self-described civil yet truly non-civil bully by the name of Don Saylor.
Our city has become like a bad cartoon. You want to change the channel, but you watch, because it’s hard to believe that this is really happenning. It’s hard to believe that it’s on TV. Wake up it is happenning right before our eyes.
How about a metal detector for the crazy people that sit on council and keep the public from speaking their minds especially when they disagree? How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz
Is it really a surprise to any of you that Ruth Asmundson, who is known for limiting public input and being EXTEMELY RUDE to members of the public, is now trying to limit the public even more????
Be honest with yourselves.
She is self-centered and thinks that we care about her travels and goes on and on about the “work she is doing…blah, blah, blah…”
Just do what you are supposed to do Ruth and stop wasting our time.
The next four years are going to be absolute hell with Ruth as mayor followed by the ever self-centered, self-described civil yet truly non-civil bully by the name of Don Saylor.
Our city has become like a bad cartoon. You want to change the channel, but you watch, because it’s hard to believe that this is really happenning. It’s hard to believe that it’s on TV. Wake up it is happenning right before our eyes.
How about a metal detector for the crazy people that sit on council and keep the public from speaking their minds especially when they disagree? How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz
Is it really a surprise to any of you that Ruth Asmundson, who is known for limiting public input and being EXTEMELY RUDE to members of the public, is now trying to limit the public even more????
Be honest with yourselves.
She is self-centered and thinks that we care about her travels and goes on and on about the “work she is doing…blah, blah, blah…”
Just do what you are supposed to do Ruth and stop wasting our time.
The next four years are going to be absolute hell with Ruth as mayor followed by the ever self-centered, self-described civil yet truly non-civil bully by the name of Don Saylor.
Our city has become like a bad cartoon. You want to change the channel, but you watch, because it’s hard to believe that this is really happenning. It’s hard to believe that it’s on TV. Wake up it is happenning right before our eyes.
How about a metal detector for the crazy people that sit on council and keep the public from speaking their minds especially when they disagree? How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz
Is it really a surprise to any of you that Ruth Asmundson, who is known for limiting public input and being EXTEMELY RUDE to members of the public, is now trying to limit the public even more????
Be honest with yourselves.
She is self-centered and thinks that we care about her travels and goes on and on about the “work she is doing…blah, blah, blah…”
Just do what you are supposed to do Ruth and stop wasting our time.
The next four years are going to be absolute hell with Ruth as mayor followed by the ever self-centered, self-described civil yet truly non-civil bully by the name of Don Saylor.
Our city has become like a bad cartoon. You want to change the channel, but you watch, because it’s hard to believe that this is really happenning. It’s hard to believe that it’s on TV. Wake up it is happenning right before our eyes.
“How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz”
Sue Greenwald?
“How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz”
Sue Greenwald?
“How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz”
Sue Greenwald?
“How about a metal detector for the person who talks in a monotone voice putting us to sleep…..zzzzzzzzzzz”
Sue Greenwald?
Asmundson and Saylor in case you cannot understand.
Asmundson and Saylor in case you cannot understand.
Asmundson and Saylor in case you cannot understand.
Asmundson and Saylor in case you cannot understand.
Monotone voice = Sue.
Heavy accent = Ruth.
Inflated ego = Don.
Wardrobe malfunction = Souza.
Robot = Lamar.
Monotone voice = Sue.
Heavy accent = Ruth.
Inflated ego = Don.
Wardrobe malfunction = Souza.
Robot = Lamar.
Monotone voice = Sue.
Heavy accent = Ruth.
Inflated ego = Don.
Wardrobe malfunction = Souza.
Robot = Lamar.
Monotone voice = Sue.
Heavy accent = Ruth.
Inflated ego = Don.
Wardrobe malfunction = Souza.
Robot = Lamar.
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
monotone = saylor
rude = asmundson
elitist = sue
very blonde = souza
smart and respectful to all = lamar
All the new Mayor needs is a few diction lessons, I’ve thought listening her on TV. But perhaps, like Henry Kissinger, she finds a unique accent to her advantage, since listeners have to strain to figure out what she’s saying sometimes, thereby giving her more undivided attention than they might a native-born American speaker.
All the new Mayor needs is a few diction lessons, I’ve thought listening her on TV. But perhaps, like Henry Kissinger, she finds a unique accent to her advantage, since listeners have to strain to figure out what she’s saying sometimes, thereby giving her more undivided attention than they might a native-born American speaker.
All the new Mayor needs is a few diction lessons, I’ve thought listening her on TV. But perhaps, like Henry Kissinger, she finds a unique accent to her advantage, since listeners have to strain to figure out what she’s saying sometimes, thereby giving her more undivided attention than they might a native-born American speaker.
All the new Mayor needs is a few diction lessons, I’ve thought listening her on TV. But perhaps, like Henry Kissinger, she finds a unique accent to her advantage, since listeners have to strain to figure out what she’s saying sometimes, thereby giving her more undivided attention than they might a native-born American speaker.
Leave Joe Sherman alone!
He has his issues, but he is doing the best he can given the circumstances God gave him.
Probably all of us have extended family members who are mentally or emotionally challenged.
I have seen Joe all over my neighborhood for about 10 years. I have thrown him out of my reception once or twice. But he is harmless, and tries his best.
And besides, you you all realize how many people swear that they turn to public comments just to see and hear Joe???
Be kind.
Leave Joe Sherman alone!
He has his issues, but he is doing the best he can given the circumstances God gave him.
Probably all of us have extended family members who are mentally or emotionally challenged.
I have seen Joe all over my neighborhood for about 10 years. I have thrown him out of my reception once or twice. But he is harmless, and tries his best.
And besides, you you all realize how many people swear that they turn to public comments just to see and hear Joe???
Be kind.
Leave Joe Sherman alone!
He has his issues, but he is doing the best he can given the circumstances God gave him.
Probably all of us have extended family members who are mentally or emotionally challenged.
I have seen Joe all over my neighborhood for about 10 years. I have thrown him out of my reception once or twice. But he is harmless, and tries his best.
And besides, you you all realize how many people swear that they turn to public comments just to see and hear Joe???
Be kind.
Leave Joe Sherman alone!
He has his issues, but he is doing the best he can given the circumstances God gave him.
Probably all of us have extended family members who are mentally or emotionally challenged.
I have seen Joe all over my neighborhood for about 10 years. I have thrown him out of my reception once or twice. But he is harmless, and tries his best.
And besides, you you all realize how many people swear that they turn to public comments just to see and hear Joe???
Be kind.
Mike Harrington,
Your sarcasm is as thick as Ruth Asmundsen’s accent.
Mike Harrington,
Your sarcasm is as thick as Ruth Asmundsen’s accent.
Mike Harrington,
Your sarcasm is as thick as Ruth Asmundsen’s accent.
Mike Harrington,
Your sarcasm is as thick as Ruth Asmundsen’s accent.
I think Mike is being sincere. Joe Sherman is nice.
I think Mike is being sincere. Joe Sherman is nice.
I think Mike is being sincere. Joe Sherman is nice.
I think Mike is being sincere. Joe Sherman is nice.
We’re tuning out, Mike.
Joe is getting more and more aggressive due to people like you providing him a forum to spew his threats of eternal damnation for all.
You want to help him? You are an attorney. Why don’t you look into his allegations and see if they are true?
We’re tuning out, Mike.
Joe is getting more and more aggressive due to people like you providing him a forum to spew his threats of eternal damnation for all.
You want to help him? You are an attorney. Why don’t you look into his allegations and see if they are true?
We’re tuning out, Mike.
Joe is getting more and more aggressive due to people like you providing him a forum to spew his threats of eternal damnation for all.
You want to help him? You are an attorney. Why don’t you look into his allegations and see if they are true?
We’re tuning out, Mike.
Joe is getting more and more aggressive due to people like you providing him a forum to spew his threats of eternal damnation for all.
You want to help him? You are an attorney. Why don’t you look into his allegations and see if they are true?
I think one has to ask at what point does a person become disruptive and counterproductive to City Council meetings? I have not heard Joe Sherman, so I cannot say one way or another. Putting that issue aside, the bottom line is Ruth is attempting to severely limit public comment, yet do nothing to curb endless comments from the dais.
That speaks volumes – clearly she cares nothing about what the public thinks, and doesn’t want to hear it. It makes one wonder how out of touch she is with public sentiment. I would guess a great deal.
Let’s face it, she wants Covell Village passed, and doesn’t want to hear any naysaying about it. Its embarrassing failure at the polls a la Measure X was anethema to her – and she is trying to devise clever ways to defeat its opponents.
I think one has to ask at what point does a person become disruptive and counterproductive to City Council meetings? I have not heard Joe Sherman, so I cannot say one way or another. Putting that issue aside, the bottom line is Ruth is attempting to severely limit public comment, yet do nothing to curb endless comments from the dais.
That speaks volumes – clearly she cares nothing about what the public thinks, and doesn’t want to hear it. It makes one wonder how out of touch she is with public sentiment. I would guess a great deal.
Let’s face it, she wants Covell Village passed, and doesn’t want to hear any naysaying about it. Its embarrassing failure at the polls a la Measure X was anethema to her – and she is trying to devise clever ways to defeat its opponents.
I think one has to ask at what point does a person become disruptive and counterproductive to City Council meetings? I have not heard Joe Sherman, so I cannot say one way or another. Putting that issue aside, the bottom line is Ruth is attempting to severely limit public comment, yet do nothing to curb endless comments from the dais.
That speaks volumes – clearly she cares nothing about what the public thinks, and doesn’t want to hear it. It makes one wonder how out of touch she is with public sentiment. I would guess a great deal.
Let’s face it, she wants Covell Village passed, and doesn’t want to hear any naysaying about it. Its embarrassing failure at the polls a la Measure X was anethema to her – and she is trying to devise clever ways to defeat its opponents.
I think one has to ask at what point does a person become disruptive and counterproductive to City Council meetings? I have not heard Joe Sherman, so I cannot say one way or another. Putting that issue aside, the bottom line is Ruth is attempting to severely limit public comment, yet do nothing to curb endless comments from the dais.
That speaks volumes – clearly she cares nothing about what the public thinks, and doesn’t want to hear it. It makes one wonder how out of touch she is with public sentiment. I would guess a great deal.
Let’s face it, she wants Covell Village passed, and doesn’t want to hear any naysaying about it. Its embarrassing failure at the polls a la Measure X was anethema to her – and she is trying to devise clever ways to defeat its opponents.
We public commenters just need to be Ruthless
We public commenters just need to be Ruthless
We public commenters just need to be Ruthless
We public commenters just need to be Ruthless
Reading some of these comments really makes me wish there was a way to uncover the anonymouses or verify some of these display names, yet I understand how important being anonymous can be sometimes…
In any case, I see nothing wrong with giving each member of the public who wishes to comment up to five minutes to speak. Another thing is, in my experience, city council members are accessible people, and if you sent them an e-mail or wanted to meet with them for a chat outside of the formal confines of a council meeting, you are much more likely to get their attention and time. Oh, but the caveat… be reasonable and respectful with them, ok?
I think in all cases it should be a judgment call issue. If the people at the council meeting really felt that Mrs. Asmundson cut off somebody inappropriately, they have the right to stand up and do something about it. It’s your city, isn’t it? On the other hand, if people in the room thought the person up at the mic was being a COUGH nutjob COUGH COUGH, sorry I mean.. bringing up an issue irrelevant to city matters, then I hope there would be a general sense in the room that it would be OK to kill the mic.
Too radical? Don’t worry, I’m just a crazy college kid. We only make up HALF of the city.
Bottom line: general guideline of 3 minutes, maximum of 5 minutes, but if enough people think the issue’s really important, give it up to roughly another 3 minutes.
Reading some of these comments really makes me wish there was a way to uncover the anonymouses or verify some of these display names, yet I understand how important being anonymous can be sometimes…
In any case, I see nothing wrong with giving each member of the public who wishes to comment up to five minutes to speak. Another thing is, in my experience, city council members are accessible people, and if you sent them an e-mail or wanted to meet with them for a chat outside of the formal confines of a council meeting, you are much more likely to get their attention and time. Oh, but the caveat… be reasonable and respectful with them, ok?
I think in all cases it should be a judgment call issue. If the people at the council meeting really felt that Mrs. Asmundson cut off somebody inappropriately, they have the right to stand up and do something about it. It’s your city, isn’t it? On the other hand, if people in the room thought the person up at the mic was being a COUGH nutjob COUGH COUGH, sorry I mean.. bringing up an issue irrelevant to city matters, then I hope there would be a general sense in the room that it would be OK to kill the mic.
Too radical? Don’t worry, I’m just a crazy college kid. We only make up HALF of the city.
Bottom line: general guideline of 3 minutes, maximum of 5 minutes, but if enough people think the issue’s really important, give it up to roughly another 3 minutes.
Reading some of these comments really makes me wish there was a way to uncover the anonymouses or verify some of these display names, yet I understand how important being anonymous can be sometimes…
In any case, I see nothing wrong with giving each member of the public who wishes to comment up to five minutes to speak. Another thing is, in my experience, city council members are accessible people, and if you sent them an e-mail or wanted to meet with them for a chat outside of the formal confines of a council meeting, you are much more likely to get their attention and time. Oh, but the caveat… be reasonable and respectful with them, ok?
I think in all cases it should be a judgment call issue. If the people at the council meeting really felt that Mrs. Asmundson cut off somebody inappropriately, they have the right to stand up and do something about it. It’s your city, isn’t it? On the other hand, if people in the room thought the person up at the mic was being a COUGH nutjob COUGH COUGH, sorry I mean.. bringing up an issue irrelevant to city matters, then I hope there would be a general sense in the room that it would be OK to kill the mic.
Too radical? Don’t worry, I’m just a crazy college kid. We only make up HALF of the city.
Bottom line: general guideline of 3 minutes, maximum of 5 minutes, but if enough people think the issue’s really important, give it up to roughly another 3 minutes.
Reading some of these comments really makes me wish there was a way to uncover the anonymouses or verify some of these display names, yet I understand how important being anonymous can be sometimes…
In any case, I see nothing wrong with giving each member of the public who wishes to comment up to five minutes to speak. Another thing is, in my experience, city council members are accessible people, and if you sent them an e-mail or wanted to meet with them for a chat outside of the formal confines of a council meeting, you are much more likely to get their attention and time. Oh, but the caveat… be reasonable and respectful with them, ok?
I think in all cases it should be a judgment call issue. If the people at the council meeting really felt that Mrs. Asmundson cut off somebody inappropriately, they have the right to stand up and do something about it. It’s your city, isn’t it? On the other hand, if people in the room thought the person up at the mic was being a COUGH nutjob COUGH COUGH, sorry I mean.. bringing up an issue irrelevant to city matters, then I hope there would be a general sense in the room that it would be OK to kill the mic.
Too radical? Don’t worry, I’m just a crazy college kid. We only make up HALF of the city.
Bottom line: general guideline of 3 minutes, maximum of 5 minutes, but if enough people think the issue’s really important, give it up to roughly another 3 minutes.